Kohlberg`s Dilemmas

Transcription

Kohlberg`s Dilemmas

Kohlberg’s Dilemmas
How to Align the Internal-Structural Definition of Moral
Competence With its Measurement
Georg Lind
www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/
© Copyright by Georg Lind, 2014
See Lind, G., 1978, 1982, and 2008.
Main Features of the Moral Competence Test (MCT)*
P Competence Testing Requires a Difficult Task: The MCT confronts the
participants with the task to judge agreeing and opposing arguments by their
moral quality rather then their opinion-agreement.
P Structural Properties of Behavior: Participants’ pattern of ratings of 24
arguments for and against a given decision.
P Structure Built into the Test: The standard MCT consists of pro and contra
arguments in two dilemma stories (workers, doctor), representing six moral
orientations, thus forming a 2 x 2 x 6 orthogonal, experimental design.
P Internal Criterion for High Moral Competence: Moral comptence is measured
independently from participant’s specific moral orientation.
P Scoring the Two Aspects of Judgment Behavior:
< Moral competence: th C-score reflects the degree to which an individual’s
action pattern is determined by his/her moral orientations.
< Moral orientation: The degree of preference for each of the six moral
orientations.
* Formerly called “Moral Judgment Test” (MJT)
MCT Example: 2nd story
Pro
Contra
Excerpt from the Moral Competence Test (MCT); Lind (2008). Contact: [email protected]
Structural Scoring
The moral competence score [C] describes
the individual pattern of responses to a multivariate test situation.
Fictitious example: Patterns of low and high competence-scores
Person A
“The decision was right”
Contra
Pro
Person:
Opinion:
Arguments on
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Stage 6
Person B
Contra
W
W
W
W
W
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
W
W
W
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
C-score: 0.4
Low moral competence
Pro
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
-4 W
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
-4 -3 -2 -1W
0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
C-score: 92.2
High moral competence
See Lind, G. (1982; 2008), also: http://www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/
Internal Standards
The moral competence score [C] is tied
to the participant’s own orientations, not to external norms
Example: Same moral competence, but different modal orientations
Person C
Contra
Pro
Person:
Opinion:
Arguments on
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Stage 6
Person B
Contra
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
W
W
W
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
W
W
W
W
C-score: 92.2
High moral competence
Modal moral orientation: Stage 1
Pro
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
-4 W
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 W
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
-4 -3 W
-2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
W +3 +4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0W
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2
+1 +2 +3 W
+4
W
C-score: 92.2
High moal competence
Modal moral orientation: Stage 6
P Hemmerling, K. (2014). Morality behind bars – An intervention study on fostering moral competence of prisoners as a new
approach to social rehabilitation. Frankfurt & New York: Peter Lang.
P Kohlberg, L (1958). The development of modes of moral thinking and choice in the years 10 to 16. University of Chicago. Unpubl.
doctoral dissertation.
P Kohlberg, L. (1964). Development of moral character and moral ideology. In: M. L. Hoffman & L. W. Hoffman, eds., Review of
Child Development Research, Vol. I, pp. 381-431. New York: Russel Sage Foundation
P Kohlberg, L. (1976), Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In: T. Lickona, ed., Moral
development and behavior: Theory, research and social issues, pp. 31-53. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
P Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development, Vol. II, The psychology of moral development. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
P Lind, G. (1982). Experimental Questionnaires: A New Approach to Personality Research. In A. Kossakowski & K. Obuchowski,
eds., Progress in Psychology of Personality. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 132 - 144.
P Lind, G. (1989). Measuring moral judgment: A review of 'The Measurement of Moral Judgment' by Anne Colby and Lawrence
Kohlberg. Human Development, 32, 388-397.
P Lind, G. (2008). The meaning and measurement of moral judgment competence revisited - A dual-aspect model. In: D. Fasko &
W. Willis, eds., Contemporary philosophical and psychological perspectives on moral development and education, pp. 185 -220.
Cresskill. NJ: Hampton Press.
P Lind, G. & Nowak, E. (2014, in press). Kohlberg’s unnoticed dilemma The external assessment of internal moral competence? In:
Zizek, B., Garz, D., & Nowak, eds., Kohlberg revisited. Rotterdam: Sense Publisher.
P Nowak, E., Schrader, D. & Zizek, B., eds. (2013), Educating competencies for democracy. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
P Piaget, J. (1981). Intelligence and affectivity: Their relation during child development. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews (Originally
published 1954).
P Rest, J. (1969). Hierarchies of comprehension and preference in a developmental-stage model of moral thinking. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.
P For more references see: http://www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/

Kohlberg`s Dilemmas

Transcription

Similar documents